summum bonum
DESCRIPTION
What is the good?TRANSCRIPT
SUMMUM BONUM
“What is the good?”
Olimpo, Emuel Jude H
11232242
Cortes, Gio Spencer R
11225645
TREDTWO C38
Humanity has always been one of the most divided beings in nature. Because of our
divergent locations, we sprouted different cultures, belief systems and values. From the height of
their civilization's age, say a Mesopotamian citizen would meet with an Aztec citizen. Imagine
the encounter that would arise from that, two almost irreconcilable ideologies clashing together.
You would have fundamentally different beings, disbarring their physical characteristics (and
even then it would be radically different) and shape unique to a human. The point here is that the
boundaries we've set up for each other, the tools with which we define ourselves with, led us to
create standards that cater specifically to the experiences that we come to believe is the norm for
all other persons. Hence the standards on right and wrong, beautiful and ugly, good and evil,
happiness and sadness, etc.
The Mesopotamian would have different conceptions on what those dichotomies mean,
and so too would the Aztec. But both would consider themselves to be correct, and if their
conceptions would be so irreconcilable, then, historically speaking, then conflict would arise.
Talk about the Nazis and the Jews, or even before them, the anti-Semitic sentiments of many of
Europe’s civilizations. Or, closer to home, the Spaniards and the ancient Filipinos – whom the
colonizers arbitrarily deemed uncultured, barbaric, and uncivilized. And similarly, the Americans
and the Native Indians, who were treated almost exactly the same. But though it is primarily
culture based, all the same, the basic tenets of those cultures are the ones that dictate the way
they operate. These core concepts that allow them to justify themselves as correct, good, and in
the right side of things is a recurring pattern in many civilizations across history.
The question then asked is this: ultimately, which core concept, value system, and culture
which is derived from those, is more important, truthful, useful, pleasurable, justifiable, rational,
and better in all senses of these words? Many attempts have been put forward to answer that
question, and this paper will discuss some of those answers.
I. Egoism
A. What is Egoism?
The term Egoism is derived from the Latin and Greek word “ego” and the
suffix “-ism”, meaning “to think of one’s self and self-interest above all others”. It
means, self and belief in an idea, respectively.
The Egoist philosophy surmises that happiness is derived from that which
brings benefits to the self. These benefits may be in the form of financial gains,
mental stimulation, praise, etc. Ergo, those things/actions that leave the only the
self in a better state than before the thing/action came into effect or being. It can
be synonymously equated to narcissism, the extreme love for one’s self.
Egoism, however, does not mean that a person does not think of others’
well-being. Only, it means that the securement of benefits or stability for one’s
self comes before those of others.
To expound on egoism further, there are three types worth exploring:
Psychological Egoism
Much like the definition given above, psychological egoism
purports all that is beneficial to the self, though it goes into the
next step of actually advocating such negative behavior such as
cowardice, weakness, or separatism.
Ethical Egoism
This subclass purports that anything that benefits the self,
in any way, is morally correct. Actions such as taking advantage of
people, cheating on an examination, appeals to authority/emotion
are all justified because they directly benefit the person doing
them. It is arguable, though, that in the wider scheme of things
these actions are not exactly that beneficial because of
interpersonal ramifications. This however digresses on the topic,
but should otherwise still be considered when a person chooses to
adhere to any form of egoism.
Rational Egoism
Very similar to Ethical Egoism, this subclass purports that
any action that benefits the person is rational. Akin to altruism, it
may be said that an action that benefits others is egoistic in that it
is done only to further social capital for the person doing it.
B. Main Proponent
Ayn Rand, born on 2
February 1905 as Alisa
Zinov’yevna Rosenbaum, is
perhaps the closest proponent of
egoism is Ayn Rand, an American
novelist, playwright, and
screenwriter famous for The
Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged,
as well as the founder or developer
of the Objectivist philosophy. She
died at the age of 77 on 6 March
1982. Her parents were Zinovy
Zakharovich Rosenbaum, a
pharmacist and businessman, and Anna Kaplan Borisovna. The objectivist
philosophy is described by Rand as the concept of man as a heroic being, with his
own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as
his noblest activity, and reason his only absolute.
Arguably a subset or form of egoism, one of the central tenets of the
objectivist philosophy is that the proper moral compass as to which people must
adhere to is that which pursues one’s own happiness – ergo, egoism. Objectivism
also furthers the idea that the only way to safeguard the benefits to the self is
through mutual self-respect among individuals, embodied in a laissez-faire
capitalist society. Overall, objectivism seeks to be a philosophical way of life,
with posits on metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, political philosophy, and
aesthetics.
Though it is merely tangent to egoism, Rand is quoted to have said “I am
not primarily an advocate of capitalism, but of egoism; and I am not primarily an
advocate of egoism, but of reason. If one recognizes the supremacy of reason and
applies it consistently, all the rest follows.
C. Evaluation
PROS
- Benefits the self
- Ensures the continuation of the self
- Justifies self-centric behavior
CONS
- May ostracize people from society
- Gives an air of undesirability
- Quintessential to elitism
D. Multimedia
II. Altruism
A. What is Altruism?
Almost a direct anti-thesis to Egoism, Altruism’s main tenet is the focus or
motivation to do actions that primarily benefits others instead of the self. In a
way, altruism plays on the description of humans as social beings, with the innate
drive to help others and to belong in the group. In the ethical sense, and in relation
to Summum Bonum, altruism denotes that good is that which can be derived from
a value that benefits solely other individuals, discounting the benefits that can be
derived for the self. It comes from the Latin root “alter” meaning other. The term
was coined by Auguste Comte, founder of the positivist movement, in order to
capture the idea that individuals had an obligation to forego their selves and well-
being in order to bring about the welfare of others. In short, the altruistic principle
is live for others.
Reciprocal altruism
The theory of reciprocal altruism was originally developed by
Robert Trivers in 1971 to explain altruism between unrelated organisms.
In it, the basic idea was that it may pay an organism to help another, if
there is an expectation of the favor being returned in the future. The cost
of this initial help is offset by the likelihood or expectation of the returns.
Taken in this context, it seems as if altruism is a form of underhanded
egoism. A requirement for reciprocal altruism, however, is that individuals
must be able to interact more than once for the reciprocal factor to come
into effect. A person who believes or adheres to this kind of altruism is
ultimately a self-serving, egoistic person as the return benefits is what
motivates him/her to help others.
Pure altruism
Given that reciprocal altruism has an underground motivation for
its acts, pure altruism therefore are those actions that are done with the
expectation or intention that there will be a future reward or benefit to the
doer. It is this type of altruism that converges with generosity that we see
is employed in the more general idea of philantrophy.
B. Main Proponent
Jesus Christ was born circa 6
B.C. in Bethlehem. Little is known about
his early life, but as a young man, he
founded Christianity, one of the world’s
most influential religions. His life is
recorded in the New Testament, more a
theological document than a biography.
According to Christians, Jesus is
considered the incarnation of God and
his teachings an example for living a
more spiritual life. Christians believe he
died for the sins of all people and rose
from the dead.
Most of Jesus's life is told through the four Gospels of the New Testament
Bible, known as the Canonical gospels, written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and
John. These are not biographies in the modern sense but accounts with allegorical
intent. They are written to engender faith in Jesus as the Messiah and the
incarnation of God, who came to teach, suffer and die for people’s sins. There is
very little written about Jesus's early life. The Gospel of Luke (2:41-52) recounts
that a 12-year-old Jesus had accompanied his parents on a pilgrimage to
Jerusalem and became separated. He was found several days later in a temple,
discussing affairs with some of Jerusalem’s elders. Throughout the New
Testament, there are trace references of Jesus working as a carpenter while a
young adult. It is believed that he began his ministry at age 30 when he was
baptized by John the Baptist, who upon seeing Jesus, declared him the Son of
God. After baptism, Jesus went into the Judean desert to fast and meditate for 40
days and nights. The Temptation of Christ is chronicled in the Gospels of
Matthew, Mark and Luke (known as the Synoptic Gospels). The Devil appeared
and tempted Jesus three times, once to turn stone to bread, once to cast himself off
a mountain where angels would save him, and once to offer him all the kingdoms
of the world. All three times, Jesus rejected the Devil's temptation and sent him
off.
C. Evaluation
PROS
- Ensures good interpersonal relationships
- Mutual welfare with regards to the give and take interpretation of
altruism
CONS
- Selflessness may lead to self-detrimental conditions, i.e. over-sacrifice
- Can make a person open to abuse and exploitation
D. Multimedia
III. Hedonism
A. What is Hedonism?
Hedonism is the philosophy that those things that bring pleasure to the self
are all that is good or value and that this is the primary motivational factor for
people who adhere to this philosophy. It also purports an action is justified if it
brings pleasure to the individual. Pleasure, in the context of hedonism, includes
all pleasant feelings or experiences, no matter the source. It includes such things
as elation, ecstasy, delight, joy, and enjoinment. Pain, on the other hand, includes
all unpleasant feelings such as aches, throbs, irritations, anxiety, anguish, chagrin,
discomfort, despair, grief, depression, guilt and remorse. Both conditions for the
verifiability of adherence to hedonism are not limited to the normative definitions
given to them. These conditions may either be states, objects, events or
characteristics.
Motivational Hedonism
This is the claim that only pleasure and the avoidance of pain is the
primary motivational factor for our actions. Taken as a subset of egoism,
hedonism purports that one’s own pleasure or pain is the motivation for
one’s actions. Here, it is furthered that these actions are always and only
motivated by the maximization of the pleasure that can be derived from
the action with the appropriate balancing of the pain one can incur.
Normative Hedonism
This is the claim that pleasure is the only thing that has value and
pain the negative of this, disvalue. According to this subset of hedonism,
friendships, actions, achievements, thoughts and values only serve in an
instrumental way, through the pleasure they give or the pain they
diminish. Reductionist thought is present in this classification of hedonism
in that common values such as honesty, autonomy, friendship and others
generally produce pleasure, leading to the relegation that stand-alone they
have a value.
Rational Hedonism
This is a conglomerate of the two previous subsets of hedonism.
This is the claim that a person’s life is centered on living a life of pleasure,
happiness and no regret; and, that the ability to live with no regrets comes
from living a good life. In Rational Hedonism, the central claims
purported by its adherents are based on the Delphic maxims found
inscribed on the ancient Temple of Apollo at Delphi, Greece. Seemingly
as a buffer to the common conception to hedonism as a selfish lifestyle,
rational hedonism forwards the idea that, because of the limitations of the
body and the goal of getting the most pleasure in life, moderation should
be exhibited in a person’s pursuit of pleasure.
B. Main Proponent
Aristippus, who lived around 435 to
356 BC was the founder of the Cyrenaic
school of philosophy, an ultra-hedonist
Greek group. He was a pupil of Socrates,
but went off on a tangent in his
philosophical outlook – teaching that the
goal of life and man was to seek pleasure by
asserting control over circumstances and
using them to your advantage. He is the son
of Aritades, born at Cyrene, in modern day
Libya. Dichotomized from Socrates,
Aristippus lived a life of luxury, actively
seeking pleasure and sensual gratification. Additionally, he is the first of Socrates’
disciples to charge money for his teachings. It is said that Aristippus lived for
some time in the court of Dionysius of Syracuse.
The Cyrenaic school Aristippus established, and expounded on by his
grandson of the same name, were known for their skeptical theory of knowledge.
They thought that we can know with certainty our immediate perceivable sense-
experiences but cannot know anything about the nature of the objects that cause
these perceptions. They reduce all knowledge as merely sensation and that these
sensations are purely subjective, depending on the individual who experiences
them, and is therefore for the Cyrenaic school’s adherents, the only possible
criterion of knowledge and conduct. Hence they believe that the sole aim for all
individuals must be pleasure.
C. Evaluation
One criticism of hedonism is that pleasure can only be derived from
experiences indirectly. For example, whereas a person plays games avidly, the
game itself is only an avenue for getting pleasure. Factors such as winning or
doing better than their opponents may be the pleasurable factor rather than the
actual game itself.
PROS
- Self-gratification
- Avoidance of pain and discomfort
CONS
- Misconstrued as selfishness or apathy to other’s plight
- May lead to dissociation with society
- Similar in light to narcissism
- Short sighted in its weighing of implications/feedback to the person
D. Multimedia
IV. Eudaemonism
A. What is Eudaemonism?
Eudaimonism (or Eudaemonism or Eudaimonia) is a moral philosophy
that defines right action as that which leads to the "well-being" of the individual,
thus holding "well-being" as having essential value. The term "eudaimonia" is a
classical Greek word, commonly translated as "happiness", but perhaps better
described as "well-being" or "human flourishing" or "good life". Eudaimonia as
the ultimate goal is an objective, not a subjective, state, and it characterizes the
well-lived life, irrespective of the emotional state of the person experiencing it. In
more general terms, Eudaimonism can be thought of as any theory that puts
personal happiness and the complete life of the individual at the center of ethical
concern. Taken in that regard, it may be thought of as a branch of egoism and
hedonism, though the nuancing for eudaemonism is that an action or thing is good
if it leaves the person better off than without it, regardless of the personal qualms
or preferences of the person experiencing those phenomena.
The concept came to fruition in Aristotle's "Nicomachean Ethics", which
dates from the 4th Century B.C., although the earlier thinkers Democritus,
Socrates and Plato described a very similar idea. Socrates, as represented in
Plato's early dialogues, held that virtue is a sort of knowledge (the knowledge of
good and evil) that is required to reach the ultimate good, or eudaimonia, which is
what all human desires and actions aim to achieve.
B. Main Proponent
Aristotle (384–322 B.C.E.)
numbers among the greatest philosophers
of all time, mainly based in Athens,
Greece. He is one of the most important
founding figures in Western Philosophy,
and the first to create a comprehensive
system of philosophy, encompassing
Ethics, Aesthetics, Politics, Metaphysics,
Logic and science. Judged solely in terms
of his philosophical influence, only Plato
is his peer: Aristotle's works shaped
centuries of philosophy from Late
Antiquity through the Renaissance, and even today continue to be studied with
keen, non-antiquarian interest. A prodigious researcher and writer, Aristotle left a
great body of work, perhaps numbering as many as two-hundred treatises, from
which approximately thirty-one survive. In all these areas, Aristotle's theories
have provided illumination, met with resistance, sparked debate, and generally
stimulated the sustained interest of an abiding readership.
Aristotle was born to an aristocratic family in Stageira on the Chalcidice
Peninsula of Macedonia. His father, Nicomachus, was the personal physician to
King Amyntas of Macedon, and Aristotle was trained and educated as a member
of the aristocracy. Aristotle's mother, Phaestis, came from Chalcis on the island of
Euboea. In 335 B.C., Aristotle established his own school just outside the walls of
Athens, known as the Lyceum, and he conducted courses at the school for the
next thirteen years. His immediate followers were known as the Peripatetics. The
Lyceum had a broader curriculum than the Academy, and a stronger emphasis on
natural philosophy.
C. Evaluation
PROS
- More inclusive than previous viewpoints or rationalities
- Open-ended on what it takes to be happy, more adoptable than
personally justifiable
CONS
- The same open-endednes makes it harder to generally justify, as traits a
person would associate with Eudaemonism could be easily associated
with more precise viewpoints or rationalities
D. Multimedia
V. Rationalism
A. What is Rationalism?
Rationalism is any view appealing to intellectual and deductive reason (as
opposed to sensory experience or any religious teachings) as the source of
knowledge or justification. Thus, it holds that some propositions are knowable by
us by intuition alone, while others are knowable by being deduced through valid
arguments from intuited propositions. Depending on the strength of the belief, this
can result in a range of positions from the moderate view that reason has
precedence over other ways of acquiring knowledge, to the radical position that
reason is the only path to knowledge.
Rationalism relies on the idea that reality has a rational structure in that all
aspects of it can be grasped through mathematical and logical principles, and not
simply through sensory experience. Rather than being a "tabula rasa" to be
imprinted with sense data, the mind is structured by, and responds to,
mathematical methods of reasoning.
Rationalists adopt at least one of three main claims:
Intuition/Deduction: Some propositions are knowable by us by
intuition alone, while others are knowable by being deduced from intuited
propositions. Some rationalists take intuition to be infallible, claiming that
whatever we intuit must be true; others allow for the possibility of false
intuited propositions. Some claim that only mathematics can be knowable
by intuition and deduction; some that ethical truths can also be intuited;
some more radical rationalists maintain that a whole range of metaphysical
claims are included within the range of intuition and deduction.
Innate Knowledge: We have knowledge of some truths as part of
our innate rational nature. Experiences may trigger a process by which we
bring this knowledge to consciousness, but the experiences do not provide
us with the knowledge itself, which has in some way been with us all
along. Some rationalists claim that we gained this innate knowledge in an
earlier existence, some that God provided us with it at creation, and others
that it is part of our nature through natural selection.
Innate Concepts: Some of the concepts (as opposed to actual
knowledge) we employ are part of our innate rational nature. Some would
argue, however, that innate concepts are entailed by innate knowledge,
because a particular instance of knowledge can only be innate if the
concepts that are contained in the proposition are also innate.
B. Main Proponent
René Descartes was born was
born on March 31, 1596, in La Haye,
France which has since been renamed
after him to honor its most famous
son.. He was the youngest of three
children, and his mother, Jeanne
Brochard, died within his first year of
life. His father, Joachim, a council
member in the provincial parliament,
sent the children to live with their
maternal grandmother, where they
remained even after he remarried a few
years later. But he was very concerned with good education and sent René, at age
8, to boarding school at the Jesuit college of Henri IV in La Flèche, several miles
to the north, for seven years. He was extensively educated, first at a Jesuit college
at age 8, then earning a law degree at 22, but an influential teacher set him on a
course to apply mathematics and logic to understanding the natural world. This
approach incorporated the contemplation of the nature of existence and of
knowledge itself, hence his most famous observation, “I think; therefore I am.”
Descartes is considered by many to be the father of modern philosophy, because
his ideas departed widely from current understanding in the early 17th century,
which was more feeling-based. While elements of his philosophy weren’t
completely new, his approach to them was. Descartes believed in basically
clearing everything off the table, all preconceived and inherited notions, and
starting fresh, putting back one by one the things that were certain, which for him
began with the statement “I exist.” Since Descartes believed that all truths were
ultimately linked, he sought to uncover the meaning of the natural world with a
rational approach, through science and mathematics—in some ways an extension
of the approach Sir Francis Bacon had asserted in England a few decades prior.
C. Evaluation
PROS
- Believes that there is a reason that a phenomena or object fulfills for that
object or phenomena to come into existence
- Tries to find the underlying concepts, rules or truth behind existence and
phenomena
- Innately inquisitive
CONS
- Their anthropocentrism is one flaw, as humans may have
misconceptions
- Logic does not always translate directly into reality, as human
understanding is limited to the senses
D. Multimedia
VI. Emotivism
A. What is Emotivism?
Emotivism can be considered a form of non-cognitivism or expressivism.
It stands in opposition to other forms of non-cognitivism, as well as to all forms of
cognitivism. Emotivists argued that moral expressions are different from factual
ones because they express emotions. Therefore ethical statements, being based on
emotions, cannot be true or false and can only be supported by persuasion, not by
evidence. Emotive theory proposes that the expression of attitudes and beliefs
should first of all express factual information—one’s beliefs, or how matters can
be “truthfully” explained, in accordance to their perspective and attempt to
persuade the listener to agree, and adopt these expressed beliefs.
The emotivism espoused by Ayer in LTL was supported by his belief in
the distinction between fact and value. Given, he thought, that there were no
moral facts to be known, there could be no verification of such facts, and so moral
utterances could have no cognitive significance. And given the connection
between moral ‘judgment’ and motivation, and the connection between
motivation and feeling, it was natural to see moral utterances as having the
function of expressing our feelings, or ‘emoting’. This view, Ayer was careful to
point out, was not that associated with subjectivism, that in making moral claims
we are describing our feelings. This latter view would make moral claims truth-
evaluable, and Ayer's moral emotivism denied that they were so evaluable. So
when we say: “Cruelty towards children is wrong” we are really expressing a
negative attitude towards killing children, and when we say “Being kind to old
people is good” we are expressing positive feelings towards such acts of kindness.
The expression of such positive or negative feelings, he later thought, also
contained a prescriptive element, so in such expressions we are also encouraging
others to share those feelings, and to act accordingly. As this makes clear, the
attitudes expressed were towards classes of acts, and not particular acts.
B. Main Proponent
Alfred Jules Ayer was
born in 1910. He was educated at
Eton and Oxford University.
After his graduation from Oxford,
he studied at the University of
Vienna, concentrating on the
philosophy of Logical Positivism.
From 1933 to 1940 he was
lecturer in philosophy at Christ
Church (College), Oxford.
During World War II he served in
the Welsh Guards and was also
engaged in military intelligence. In 1945, he returned to Oxford where he became
a fellow and Dean of Wadham College. In the following year, he became Grote
Professor of the Philosophy of Mind and Logic at University College, London. In
1959, he returned to Oxford, where he became Wykeham Professor of Logic, a
position he held until his retirement in 1978. He was elected a fellow of the
British Academy in 1952 and honorary fellow of Wadham College, Oxford, in
1957. Among his many awards, Ayer received an honorary doctorate from
Brussels University in 1962 and was knighted in 1970. He was also an honorary
member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and chevalier of the
Legion d'Honneur.
Language, Truth and Logicis one of Ayer's most important books and may
be considered as one of the most influential philosophical works of the 20th
century. In the second edition (1946), Ayer clarified some of his ideas and replied
to his critics, but essentially his philosophical position remained the same. He
called his philosophy "logical empiricism," a variation of logical positivism, the
philosophical orientation he learned in Vienna. He was largely influenced by the
thought of the 20th century philosophers Bertrand Russell and Ludwig
Wittgenstein and by the earlier empiricism of George Berkeley and David Hume.
The book is a milestone in the development of philosophical thought in the
20th century. The implications of Ayer's "logical empiricism" would be felt by
many branches of the discipline of philosophy, especially metaphysics, ethics, and
philosophy of religion, and also logic, mathematics, and the philosophy of
science. Although Ayer acknowledged the influences upon his philosophical
perspective, he remained an independent thinker, accepting no position
uncritically.
C. Evaluation
PROS
- Somewhat also inclusive at it caters to a common ground in human
characteristics – feelings
- Allows a freedom in action so long as they are to your emotions,
reminiscent of situationism
CONS
- Highly subjective, the justification that it relies only on emotions is the
only common ground tangibly visible from subscribers to it
D. Multimedia
VII. Intuitionism
A. What is Intuitionism?
Intuitionism is the approach in Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
which takes mathematics to be the constructive mental activity of humans. Thus,
it holds that logic and mathematics do not consist of analytic activities wherein
deep properties of existence are revealed and applied, but rather they are the
application of internally consistent methods to realize more complex mental
constructs. According to Intuitionism, the truth of a statement is equivalent to the
mathematician being able to intuit the statement, and not necessarily to its
provability. It requires the application of intuitionistic logic, which preserves
justification, rather than truth, for derived propositions. Any mathematical object
is considered to be the product of a construction of a mind, so that if it can be
constructed then it exists. Intuitionism is therefore a variety of Mathematical
Constructivism in that it asserts that it is necessary to find (or "construct") a
mathematical object to prove that it exists. That is, the truth of a mathematical
statement can only be conceived via a mental construction that proves it to be
true, and the communication between mathematicians only serves as a means to
create the same mental process in different minds.
George Edward Moore argued that, once arguments based on the
naturalistic fallacy had been discarded, questions of intrinsic goodness could only
be settled by appeal to what he called "moral intuitions" (self-evident propositions
which recommend themselves to moral reflection, but which are not susceptible to
either direct proof or disproof), a view often described as Ethical Intuitionism.
However, as a Consequentialist, Moore distinguished his view from those of
Deontological Intuitionists, who held that "intuitions" could determine questions
about what actions are right or required by duty. He argued that "duties" and
moral rules could be determined by investigating the effects of particular actions
or kinds of actions, and so were matters for empirical investigation rather than
direct objects of intuition.
B. Main Proponent
George Edward Moore (usually
known as G. E. Moore) (1873 - 1958) was
a 20th Century English philosopher. He
was, along with Gottlob Frege, Bertrand
Russell and Ludwig Wittgenstein, one of
the founders of Analytic Philosophy.
Moore was born on 4 November 1873, one
of seven children of Daniel and Henrietta
Moore, and grew up in the Upper Norwood
district of South London. His early
education came at the hands of his parents,
his father teaching him reading, writing,
and music (he was a more-than-competent pianist and composer), and his mother
teaching him French. At the age of eight he was enrolled at Dulwich College,
where he studied mainly Greek and Latin, but also French, German and
mathematics.
In 1892, he went to Trintity College Cambridge where he initially studied
Classics. Early in his time at Cambridge he became close friends with some of the
writers and intellectuals who would go on to form the Bloomsbury Group,
including Lytton Strachey, Leonard Woolf and Maynard Keynes. He soon made
the acquaintance of Bertrand Russell, who was two years ahead of him, and J. M.
E. McTaggart (1866 - 1925), who was then a charismatic young Philosophy
Fellow. He followed them into the study of Philosophy, and he graduated in
Classics and Philosophy in 1896. In 1898, he earned a "Prize" Fellowship which
enabled him to continue to study philosophy at Trinity along with Russell and
McTaggart. Beginning around 1897, Moore began to participate in various
philosophical societies (such as the Aristotelian Society and the Moral Sciences
Club) and to publish his early work (many of his best known and most influential
works date from this early period). It was also during this time that Moore
instigated the momentous break from the then dominant philosophy of Absolute
Idealism that would prove to be the first step toward the rise of Analytic
Philosophy.
C. Evaluation
PROS
- Surmises that there is a common ground between everything, like the
rationalists, however the difference is that intuitionists hold that the
needed processes to achieve knowing that common ground is present in
all humans
CONS
- Bases their ideology on the assumption that the common ground and the
commonality of the tool to achieve that common ground is true
D. Multimedia
VIII. Pragmatism
A. What is Pragmatism?
Pragmatism (or Pragmaticism) is the view that considers practical
consequences or real effects to be vital components of both meaning and truth.
More simply, something is true only insofar as it works. It argues that the
meaning of any concept can be equated with the conceivable operational or
practical consequences of whatever the concept portrays. Pragmatism asserts that
any theory that proves itself more successful in predicting and controlling our
world than its rivals can be considered to be nearer the truth. Thus, slow and
stumbling ratiocination is not necessarily to be automatically preferred over
instinct, introspection and tradition, which are all valid methods for philosophical
investigation, even if they each have their own drawbacks. The scientific method
is generally best suited to theoretical inquiry, although the settlement of doubt can
also be achieved by tenacity and persistence, the authority of a source of ready-
made beliefs or other methods. Pragmatists believe that truth is not "ready-made",
but that truth is made jointly by us and reality. Some pragmatists also believe that
that truth is mutable (beliefs can pass from being true to being untrue and back
again), and that truth is relative to a conceptual scheme. Pragmatists contend that
most philosophical topics—such as the nature of knowledge, language, concepts,
meaning, belief, and science—are all best viewed in terms of their practical uses
and successes rather than in terms of representative accuracy.
After the first wave of Pragmatism, the movement split and gave rise to
three main sub-schools, in addition to other more independent, non-aligned
thinkers:
Neo-Classical Pragmatism inherits most of the tenets of the classical
Pragmatists,
Neo-Pragmatism (sometimes called Linguistic Pragmatism) is a type of
Pragmatism, although it differs in its philosophical methodology or conceptual
formation from classical Pragmatism
French Pragmatism is a specifically French off-shoot of the movement
B. Main Proponent
Charles Sanders Peirce
was born on September 10, 1839
in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and
he died on April 19, 1914 in
Milford, Pennsylvania. His
writings extend from about 1857
until near his death, a period of
approximately 57 years. His
published works run to about
12,000 printed pages and his
known unpublished manuscripts
run to about 80,000 handwritten
pages. The topics on which he
wrote have an immense range, from mathematics and the physical sciences at one
extreme, to economics, psychology, and other social sciences at the other
extreme. Peirce's father Benjamin Peirce was Professor of Mathematics at
Harvard University and was one of the founders of the U. S. Coast and Geodetic
Survey as well as one of the founders of the Smithsonian Institution. The
department of mathematics at Harvard was essentially built by Benjamin. From
his father, Charles Sanders Peirce received most of the substance of his early
education as well as a good deal of intellectual encouragement and stimulation.
Benjamin's didactic technique mostly took the form of setting interesting
problems for his son and checking Charles's solutions to them. In this challenging
instructional atmosphere Charles acquired his lifelong habit of thinking through
philosophical and scientific problems entirely on his own. To this habit, perhaps,
is to be attributed Charles Peirce's considerable originality. +Peirce graduated
from Harvard in 1859 and received the bachelor of science degree in chemistry in
1863. For thirty-two years, from 1859 until late 1891, he was employed by the U.
S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, mainly surveying and carrying out geodetic
investigations. For over thirty years, then, Peirce was involved in practical and
theoretical problems associated with making scientific measurements. This
involvement was crucial in his ultimately coming to reject scientific determinism,
as we shall see.
C. Evaluation
PROS
- Focuses more on results rather than the concepts in operation in the
background
- More tangible in that the thing that matters is that which positively
affects individuals
CONS
- May seem materialistic in that if an action or phenomena does not
produce adequate and satisfactory results, then that idea is scrapped or
back-seated
D. Multimedia
IX. Empiricism
A. What is Empiricism?
Empiricism is the theory that the origin of all knowledge is sense
experience. It emphasizes the role of experience and evidence, especially sensory
perception, in the formation of ideas, and argues that the only knowledge humans
can have is a posteriori (i.e. based on experience). Most empiricists also discount
the notion of innate ideas or innatism (the idea that the mind is born with ideas or
knowledge and is not a "blank slate" at birth). The concept of a "tabula rasa" (or
"clean slate") had been developed as early as the 11th Century by the Persian
philosopher Avicenna, who further argued that knowledge is attained through
empirical familiarity with objects in this world, from which one abstracts
universal concepts, which can then be further developed through a syllogistic
method of reasoning. The 12th Century Arabic philosopher Abubacer
demonstrated the theory of tabula rasa as a thought experiment in which the mind
of a feral child develops from a clean slate to that of an adult, in complete
isolation from society on a desert island, through experience alone.
Insofar as we have knowledge in the subject, our knowledge is a
posteriori, dependent upon sense experience. Empiricists also deny the
implication of the corresponding Innate Concept thesis that we have innate ideas
in the subject area. Sense experience is our only source of ideas. They reject the
corresponding version of the Superiority of Reason thesis. Since reason alone
does not give us any knowledge, it certainly does not give us superior knowledge.
Empiricists generally reject the Indispensability of Reason thesis, though they
need not. The Empiricism thesis does not entail that we have empirical
knowledge. It entails that knowledge can only be gained, if at all, by experience.
Empiricists may assert, as some do for some subjects, that the rationalists are
correct to claim that experience cannot give us knowledge. The conclusion they
draw from this rationalist lesson is that we do not know at all.
B. Main Proponent
David Hume (1711 - 1776)
was a Scottish philosopher,
economist and historian of the Age
of Enlightenment. He was an
important figure in the Scottish
Enlightenment and, along with
John Locke and Bishop George
Berkeley, one of the three main
figureheads of the influential
British Empiricism movement.
He was a fierce opponent
of the Rationalism of Descartes,
Leibniz and Spinoza, as well as an
atheist and a skeptic. He has come to be considered as one of the most important
British philosophers of all time, and he was a huge influence on later
philosophers, from Immanuel Kant and Arthur Schopenhauer to the Logical
Positivists and Analytic Philosophers of the 20th Century, as well as on
intellectuals in other fields. Hume was born on 26 April 1711 in a tenement on the
Lawnmarket in Edinburgh, Scotland. His father was Joseph Home and the
aristocrat Katherine Lady Falconer. He changed his name to Hume in 1734
because the English had difficulty pronouncing "Home" in the Scottish manner.
He was well read, even as a child, and had a good grounding in Greek and Latin.
He attended the University of Edinburgh at the unusually early age of twelve,
although he had little respect for the professors there and soon threw over a
prospective career in law in favour of philosophy and general learning. At the
tender age of eighteen, he made a great "philosophical discovery" that led him to
devote the next ten years of his life to a concentrated period of study, reading and
writing, almost to the verge of a nervous breakdown.
As an Empiricist, Hume was always concerned with going back to
experience and observation, and this led him to touch on some difficult ideas in
what would later become known as the Philosophy of Language. For instance, he
was convinced that for a word to mean anything at all, it had to relate to a specific
idea, and for an idea to have real content it had to be derived from real experience.
If no such underlying experience can be found, therefore, the word effectively has
no meaning.
C. Evaluation
PROS
- Like pragmatism, empiricism denotes that truth/knowledge come from
events that are personally experienced and personally confirmed to be
true, leading to a stronger degree of justification
- Has the idea that individual experiences can be used to justify the larger,
more generalized concept of that experience, possibly leading to
experimentation to hold true that justification
CONS
- Personal perceptions are arbitrary, nulling some of the claims of
empiricists
- Knowledge devoid from all humans experiencing an event would lead
them to a misconclusion, as compared to another group who would
experience the same but having knowledge of the underlying concepts
D. Multimedia
X. What is CONSEQUENTIALISM?
- It is an approach to ethics that argues that the morality of an action is contingent
on the action’s outcome or consequence. Thus, a morally right action is on that
produces a good outcome or result, and the consequences of an action or rule
generally outweigh all other considerations. Simply speaking, in determining
whether an action was right or wrong, the nature of the consequence/result of the
said action is the determining factor. Ergo, the ends justify the means.
- There are many theories under consequentialism, such as:
o Utilitarianism
This theory tells us that an action is right if it leads to the most
happiness for the greatest number of people, i.e., maximization of
pleasure and minimization of pain in respect to the greatest number
of people at a given time.
o Hedonism
This theory tells us that pleasure is the most important pursuit of
mankind, and that individuals should strive to maximize their own
total pleasure.
o Egoism
This theory tells us that an action is right if it maximizes good for
the self. Therefore, egoism tells us that an action can be good for
an individual even if it can be detrimental to other people.
o Asceticism
This theory is the opposite of egoism, in some ways. It states
abstinence from egoistic pleasures especially to achieve a spiritual
goal.
o Altruism
This theory tells us that an individual should take actions that have
the best consequences for everyone except for himself. Individuals
have the moral obligation to serve others, even at times sacrificing
of self-interest.
Main Proponent
The person who coined the term “consequentialism”
was Elizabeth Anscombe (Born Gertrude Elizabeth
Margaret Anscombe ; 1919 - 2001). She coined it in
her 1958 essay “Modern Moral Philosophy”.
Elizabeth was a British analytic philosopher. She wrote
on topics such as philosophy of mind, philosophy of
action, philosophical logic, philosophy of language,
and ethics. She was born in Limerick, Ireland to Allens
Wells Anscombe and Gertrude Elizabeth Anscombe.
She studied in St. Hugh’s College, Oxford. During her
first undergraduate year, she converted to Roman
Catholicism, and graduated in 1941. She publicly
opposed Britain’s entry into World War II, even
though her father and one of her brothers served during the war.
She was married to Peter Geach in 1941, also a Roman Catholic convert and student of
Wittgenstein, where Geach was also a distinguished British academic philosopher. They had
three sons and four daughters.
One of the most highlighted parts of Elizabeth’s life was her debate with C.S. Lewis. In
1948, she presented a paper at a meeting in Oxford’s Socratic Club and disputed C.S. Lewis’
argument on naturalism. Some of Lewis associates have remarked that Lewis lost the debate and
was so humiliated that he abandoned theological argument and devoted his time entirely
children’s literature and devotional writing.
In the later years of Anscombe’s life, she suffered from heart disease and was nearly killed in
a car crash in 1996. She spent her last years under the care of her family in Cambridge, and died
at 81 years old. She was buried alongside the person she was a student of, Ludwig Wittgenstein
Valid Claims (Strengths) Weaknesses
It considers greatly the consequences of our
actions.
Does not consider moral character of the
person doing the action
It can be used for practicality/rationality
(case-to-case basis)
Incomplete explanation on why something is
right or wrong other than nature of its results
It can be used to justify certain actions on the
basis that the end result’s effects are greater
or have more force and weight compared to
the actions undertaken to achieve the result.
It is basically a Machiavellian principle, “The
ends justify the means.” where the actions in
between are disregarded and only the end
result is the most important.
Evaluation of CONSEQUENTIALISM
XI. What is
NIHILISM?
- It is a philosophical stance in which it argues that Being, especially past and
current human experience, is without objective meaning or purpose,
incomprehensible truth, or essential value.
- It also asserts that there is no reasonable proof of the existence of a higher
ruler/creator, that “true morality” doesn’t exist, and that objective secular ethics
are impossible.
- Ergo, life has no truth and no action is objectively preferable over another.
- One of the branches of philosophy that allows absolute nothingness.
- There are many types of nihilism, such as:
o Metaphysical Nihilism (Blob Theory)
This theory tells us that there are no objects, or that no objects
exist. Empirical reality is an illusion.
o Mereological Nihilism (Compositional Nihilism)
This theory tells us that objects with proper parts, i.e., objects that
are tangibly made from a wide array of things, do not exist, and
that the only basic building blocks, i.e., electrons and quarks and
etc, exist. The smallest building blocks are individual and separate
never unify or come together, therefore things that we see as whole
are just illusory and a product of human misperception.
One philosopher who forwarded this idea is Peter Unger, in his
papers “There Are No Ordinary Things” and “I Do Not Exist”.
o Partial Nihilism
This theory argues that only objects of certain kind have parts
(building blocks).
One example of this is Organicism, a view that living beings are
composites, i.e., objects that have parts, ergo they exist. But other
objects, however, are not, and consequently, do not really exist
even if we perceive them to be.
Objects that do not exist are called “simples”, and are only
arranged in a certain manner perceivable to us. E.g., atoms are
arranged “table-wise”
o Moral Nihilism
This theory views that ethical claims are generally false.
It holds that there are no objective moral facts or true propositions,
i.e., nothing is morally good, wrong, bad, right, etc., because there
are no moral truths. (e.g. A moral nihilist would say that murder is
not wrong, BUT neither is it right)
Main Proponent
Nihilism was first popularized by novelist Ivan
Turgenev (1818 - 1883). Ivan Turgenev is a
Russian novelist, short story writer, and
playwright. His first major publication, a short
story collection entitled “A Sportsman’s Sketches”
and his novel “Fathers and Sons” are regarded as
major works of 19th century fiction.
Turgenev (born Ivan Sergeyevich Turgenev) was
born into a Russian land-owning families in Oryol,
Russia on November 9, 1818. His father, a colonel
in the Russian cavalry, Sergei Nikolaevich
Turgenev, was a chronic philanderer. While his
mother, Varvara Petrovna Lutovinova, was a
wealthy heiress but had an unhappy childhood and
suffered in her marriage. Ivan’s father died when he was 16 years old. Thus, Ivan’s childhood
was a lonely one; living in constant fear of his mother, who often beat him. After standard
schooling, for one year, he studied at the University of Moscow, and then moved to the
University of Saint Petersburg (1834 - 1837) where he focused on Classics, Russian literature,
and Philosophy. He also studied philosophy in the University of Berlin (1838 - 1841) and also
history. He returned after to Saint Petersburg to complete his master’s examination.
Turgenev liked German society and wanted to incorporate ideas from the Age of Enlightenment
to Russia. He was also opposed to serfdom. He was also close friends with Gustave Flaubert. He
had strained relations with Leo Tolstoy, particularly because Ivan had a growing preference for
Western Europe.
Turgenev died at Bougival, near Paris on 3 September 1883. His remains were taken to Russia
and buried in Volkoff Cemetery in St. Petersburg. He pleaded to Tolstoy on his death bed, “My
friend, return to literature!”, and consequently Tolstoy wrote works such as “The Death of Ivan
Ilyich” and “The Kreutzer Sonata”.
Evaluation of NIHILISM
Valid Claims (Strengths) Weaknesses
Having said that everything has no meaning
or purpose, we are not restricted to a single
way of life.
Believing that nothing has meaning or
purpose, people might be persuaded to do
nothing productive in their since there is no
point.
Any action can be justifiable because there is
no absolute truth
Nihilism is the gray area, because nothing is
right but nothing is wrong, either.
XII. What is MACHIAVELLIANISM?
- It is used to describe someone who, in psychology, has the propensity to be
unemotional, and therefore able to detach himself from conventional morality and
has the ability to deceive and manipulate others
- It describes someone who is instrumental, able to use others and things most of
the time in duplicitous ways
- It is a term used for someone who is manipulative in nature and low on emotional
intelligence
- In some ways, Machiavellianism is a sort of Egoism
Main Proponent
The term “machiaviellianism” came from none other than
the man himself, Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli (1469-1527).
Machiavelli was from Florence, Italy, and is known to be a
philosopher, political theorist, diplomat, musician and writer of the
Renaissance period. He is also a prominent political figure during
the time, a time of wars between city-states and constantly shifting
alliances.
Machiavelli was born to Bernardo di Niccolo Machiavelli
and Bartolomea di Stefano Nelli, being the third child of the family and first son. The
Machiavelli family are believed to have descended from the old Marquesses of Tuscany. He was
never a full citizen of Florence because of the nature of the Florentine citizenship at the time. In
1498, when the republic was restored in Florence and the Medici expelled, he, at age 29, was
elected as head of the second chancery and also made secretary of the Dieci di Liberta e Pace. He
was a diplomatic council responsible for negotiations and military affairs. He carried out several
important diplomatic missions, such as going to the courts of Louis XII (France), Ferdinand II of
Aragon (Spain), Germany, and the Papacy of Rome. He was also a witness to the brutal state-
building methods of Cesare Borgia and his father Pope Alexander VI who tried to bring majority
of Italy under their possession, using the pretext of defending the Church’s interests as a partial
justification. He was also responsible for the creation of the Florentine militia because he
distrusted mercenaries. When the Medici returned to power at around the 1500s, he was deprived
of his position an accused with conspiracy, and subsequently arrested and imprisoned and
tortured. His masterpiece, The Prince, was written after the Medici regained power and when
Machiavelli retired to his estate. He is credited to be the founder of modern politics because of
his works such as The Prince and many more. He died in 1527, aged 58. His epitaph was, in
Latin, “Tanto nomini nullum par elogium”, meaning “so great a name has no adequate praise”.
Evaluation of Machiavellianism
Valid Claims (Strengths) Weaknesses
It is useful for worldly goals It does not consider other factors; only the
self (others only if they are mutually aligned)
It can be used to make rational and logical
decision not swayed by, most but not all the
time, irrational and illogical emotional
responses.
It does not take into consideration emotions,
especially when the topic regards emotions as
something that holds weight.
XIII. What is DARWINISM?
- Everything is based on natural selection
- Everything is causal, meaning there is no specific purpose or goal
- This theory tells us that everything seems purposeful because of the intertwining
of a vast array of causal events, and only we are trying to see the purpose in them
- Ignores the concept of intelligent designs
- If referred to Social Darwinism, it basically means “survival of the fittest”
Main Proponent
Obviously, it is Charles Robert Darwin (1809-1882), or simply Charles Darwin, who is
the proponent, for it is named after him. He was an
English naturalist and geologist, wherein he was
famously known for his contributions to science in
evolutionary theory when he wrote “On the Origin of
the Species” in 1859.
He was born in Shrewsbury, Shropshire, England to the wealthy society doctor and
financier Robert Darwin and Susannah Wedgewood
Darwin, being the fifth out of the six children. He
joined the scientific field at a young age. He worked
hard in his scientific pursuits, and these were partly
the cause of his decline in health. He married his cousin, Emma Wedgwood and they had ten
children.. In 1882, he died because of angina attacks and heart failure. His works had greatly
affected religions, such as the Catholic Church, and greatly influenced scientific progress at his
time.
Evaluation of Darwinism
Valid Claims (Strengths) Weaknesses
It makes us think rationally because everyone
thinks for himself in order to survive.
It ignores concepts of intelligent design and
does not take into consideration planned
actions.
There is nothing truly purposeful because
everything is just based on natural selection.
It has the propensity to tell us that nothing in
life is meaningful because of its causal nature.
XIV. What is EVOLUTION
- This philosophical concept talks about change
- An underappreciated branch in philosophy, but nonetheless very important
because it talks about many aspects of change especially related in human
evolution
- This concept is paired with Darwinism most of the time, since it talks about
change
Main Proponent
Charles Robert Darwin (1809-1882) is also the main proponent for Evolution because the
first philosophy attributed to him, Darwinism, results
in a new concept, which is Evolution. He was an
English naturalist and geologist, wherein he was
famously known for his contributions to science in
evolutionary theory when he wrote “On the Origin of
the Species” in 1859.
He was born in Shrewsbury, Shropshire, England to the wealthy society doctor and
financier Robert Darwin and Susannah Wedgewood
Darwin, being the fifth out of the six children. He
joined the scientific field at a young age. He worked
hard in his scientific pursuits, and these were partly the cause of his decline in health. He married
his cousin, Emma Wedgwood and they had ten children.. In 1882, he died because of angina
attacks and heart failure. His works had greatly affected religions, such as the Catholic Church,
and greatly influenced scientific progress at his time.
Evaluation of Evolution
Valid Claims (Strengths) Weaknesses
It considers change as good because it is Even if there is change, it does not consider
moving from an old form to a new form, i.e.,
it’s only basis for something good is when
change happens.
whether that change is inherently good or bad,
nor does it consider whether the change will
result in something good or bad. Its only basis
for something good is simply the fact of
change happening
XV. What is SITUATIONISM?
- This theory talks about human behavior and decisions being based from their
environment rather than innate, personal qualities
- The “good” or “bad” is only determinable in the situation itself
- Every situation is unique in itself, meaning what could be “good” in a certain
situation could be “bad” in another
- It’s values depend on the situation affecting the person
Main Proponent
Joseph Francis Fletcher (1905 - 1991) was an American
professor who founded situationism (situation ethics) and also a
pioneer in bioethics. Even though he was ordained as an Episcopal
priest, he later became an atheist.
Fletcher was a very scholarly professor, being able to teach and
participate in symposia, writing ten books, not including more than a hundred articles, book
reviews, etc. He taught Christian Ethics at Episcopal Divinity School, Cambridge, Massachusetts
and also at Harvard Divinity School. He also taught in the University of Virginia, being the first
professor in medical ethics and also where he co-founded the Program in Biology and Society.
He eventually retired from teaching in 1977. He was also named Humanist of the Year and was
president of Euthanasia Society of America (later, Society of the Right to Die), member of the
American Eugenics Society and the Association for Voluntary Sterilization.
Evaluation of Situationism
Valid Claims (Strengths) Weaknesses
It breaks the normative structures of ethics
because of its dependency on the situation,
which is good for very complex and critical
situations.
Since it doesn’t have a solid foundation on
where to base its good and bad, it doesn’t
have a firm stance meaning what is good in
this situation could be bad in the next.
It is largely dependent on the situation and
therefore people are not constrained to strictly
adhere to certain morals when those morals
contradict the situation, but part of those must
Situationism is also based on an individual’s
understanding of the situation. Therefore, it
can’t be absolutely assured that all individuals
will have a clear understanding of the current
be broken in order to serve a greater good. situation nor can it be sure that all individuals
can think morally the same.
XVI. UTILITARIANISM?
- It is a form of Hedonism that states that something is good when it produces the
greatest amount of utility or worth
- It is the maximization of pleasure and happiness of all people
- The most important value in this theory is happiness and pleasure
- Comparatively, the disvaluing part is pain and suffering
- It’s origins can be traced back to Epicureanism
Main proponent
The main proponent for Utilitarianism is Jeremy
Bentham, an English philosopher, political radical, and,
legal and social reformer of the early Modern Period. He
was born in Spitalfields, London on 15 February 1748 to
the son of a wealthy Tory attorney. A child prodigy, he
started studying Latin at age three. He went to
Westminster School at age 12, and took his Bachelor’s
degree when he was 15, and also took his Master’s
Degree at 18 in Queen’s College, Oxford. He studied as a
lawyer in Lincoln’s Inn, London, was called to the bar in
1769 (21 years of age) but he never really practiced the
profession of law.
He changed his early Conservative political views after reading the work of Joseph
Priestley, an 18th Century British Theologian and Natural Philosopher. His first major work, “A
Fragment on Government”, gained much attention, wherein the work criticized the then leading
legal theorist Sir William Blackstone, which enabled him to become friends with a powerful
Lord Shelburne. He gained followers such as David Ricardo and Robert Owen.
Bentham died in 6 June 1832 in his native country, London, and, as he requested in his final will
and testament, his body was preserved and stored in a wooden cabinet. He called it his “Auto-
Icon”, and is still kept on display at University College, London.
Evaluation of Utilitarianism
Valid Claims (Strengths) Weaknesses
It concentrates on making people happy, and
what makes people happy is virtually good.
Even if something makes people happy, on
another perspective it, the action, might not
necessarily be good.
The positive and negative consequences of
our actions can be measured, giving us an
objective and independent way of deciding
what is right/good or wrong/bad.
It has a tendency of making people selfish and
subjective, because people have different
views on what makes them happy.
XVII. What is MARXISM?
- It is the promotion of socialism, wherein everyone is equal and everyone is self-
governing
- It depicts the class struggle of people, i.e., the bourgeoisie vs. the proletariats
- It attempts to make a “proletariat dictatorship”, meaning the rule of the lower
class
- Another element of this theory besides equality is materialism
- It made its entrance to history when “The Communist Manifesto” was published
by Marx and Engels
Main Proponent
Karl Heinrich Marx (1818 - 1883) was a German
philosopher, political theorist and revolutionary of the 19th
Century. He is often called the father of Communism,
because communist ideals were derived from his Marxist
ideals.
He was born in Trier, Prussia (Germany) on May 5
1818 being the third of seven children in a Jewish family.
His father, Heinrich Marx, was from a continuing line of
Jewish rabbis but converted to Lutheran Christianity in
order to practice law; his mother was Henriette Pressburg.
He was home-schooled until age 13, afterwhich he attended Trier Gymnasium, and at age 17 he
studied at University of Bonn to study law, but was moved to Humboldt University, Berlin
because he wasn’t taking his studies (of law, as he wasn’t allowed to take his preferred course,
philosophy and literature, by his father for practical reasons) seriously.
At Humboldt, he began to become more absorbed in atheistic philosophy by the Young
Hegelians. He earned his doctorate in 1841 with his thesis entitled “The Difference Between the
Democritean and Epicurean Philosophy of Nature”. He married Jenny vonn Westphalen, an
educated daughter of a Prussian Baron. The greatest turning point in Marx’s life was when he
met Friedrich Engels, wherein they would later continue to co-publish “The Communist
Manifesto” which would be the basis for communism
Evaluation of Marxism
Valid Claims (Strengths) Weaknesses
[THEORETICALLY ]It looks at what society
wants as a whole and values that more rather
than the wants of the few, the elite.
[THEORETICALLY] It doesn’t take into
consideration how people think because
society can be divided into a whole slew
different thinking people, which can lead to
disharmony if it is forced to take into
consideration all their opinions
[APPLICATION] It turns over all power to
the State, wherein the people do not have to
worry about anything anymore except for
working, because the State will essentially
provide to them everything they need.
[APPLICATION]This theory is very
vulnerable to corruption because all power is
in the State; there is no check-and-balance
between the State and people
We see through this paper that humanity has a lot of attempts in order to satisfy the
Summum Bonum. Though limited, this paper has substantially covered at least the core
philosophical principles that have made an effect in the world we live in. So the question
ultimately remains: “What is the GOOD?” These philosophical ideas have attempted to create
the highest standard in judging morals. However, in their attempt to do so, it is observable that
this is attempt to create the highest standard in judging morals is what has ultimately led to their
failure. These philosophies have also, in their attempt, boxed reality in their individual worlds to
suit their individual characteristics while ultimately denying the existence of the others, thus
certain facets of reality aren’t considered and are ignored. In short, all these philosophies are
reductionist in nature.
Then, if these “realities”, these philosophies, have failed, the question still remains. What
is the good? Can there really be a measure for the “good”? No, there is no best norm for
determining the good. This is because we cannot entrap reality, its entirety, into our limited
ideals. Life is too complex to box into a single philosophy. Thus, life can be all these
philosophies, but not one of them only. In man’s pursuit for the ultimate norm, life has, since
time immemorial, eluded in giving man the answer it seeks. Man will continue to create more
and more philosophies to suit the his tastes, varying only in eras, but nonetheless all are the same
in essence. There is no ultimate normative approach that man can utilize and it will continue
until the end of time.
References:
Shaver, R. (2010). “Egoism”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 15
October 2013 from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2010/entries/egoism/
Mastin, L. (2008). “Egoism”, The Basics of Philosophy. Retrieved 15 October 2013 from
http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_egoism.html
Ayn Rand. (2013). The Biography Channel website. Retrieved 15 October 2013 from
http://www.biography.com/people/ayn-rand-9451526.
Mastin, L. (2008). “Altruism”, The Basics of Philosophy. Retrieved 15 October 2013
from http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_altruism.html
Jesus Christ. (2013). The Biography Channel website. Retrieved 15 October 2013 from
http://www.biography.com/people/jesus-christ-9354382.
Moore, A. (2011). “Hedonism”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 15
October from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2011/entries/hedonism/
Mastin, L. (2008). “Hedonism”, The Basics of Philosophy. Retrieved 15 October 2013
from http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_hedonism.html
O’Keefe, T. (2005). “Aristippus”, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 15
October from http://www.iep.utm.edu/aristip/
Mastin, L. (2008). “Eudaimonism”, The Basics of Philosophy. Retrieved 15 October 2013
from http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_eudaimonism.html
Mastin, L. (2008). “Aristotle”, The Basics of Philosophy. Retrieved 15 October 2013
from http://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_aristotle.html
Markie, P. (2013). “Rationalism vs. Empiricism”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy. Retrieved 15 October 2013 from
http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2013/entries/rationalism-empiricism/
Mastin, L. (2008). “Rationalism”, The Basics of Philosophy. Retrieved 15 October 2013
from http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_rationalism.html
Mastin, L. (2008). “René Descartes”, The Basics of Philosophy. Retrieved 15 October
2013 from http://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_descartes.html
Macdonald, G. (2010). “Alfred Jules Ayer”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Retrieved 15 October 2013 from
http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_logical_positivism.html
Mastin, L. (2008). “Logical Positivism”, The Basics of Philosophy. Retrieved 15 October
2013 from http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_logical_positivism.html
Mastin, L. (2008). “Intuitionism”, The Basics of Philosophy. Retrieved 15 October 2013
from http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_intuitionism.html
Baldwin, T. (2010). “George Edward Moore”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Retrieved 15 October 2013 from
http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2010/entries/moore/
Preston, A. (2005). “George Edward Moore”, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Retrieved 15 October 2013 from http://www.iep.utm.edu/moore/
Mastin, L. (2008). “Pragmatism”, The Basics of Philosophy. Retrieved 15 October 2013
from http://www.philosophybasics.com/movements_pragmatism.html
Bookway, C. (2013). “Pragmatism”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved
15 October 2013 from
http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2013/entries/pragmatism/
Mastin, L. (2008). “Pragmatism”, The Basics of Philosophy. Retrieved 15 October 2013
from http://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_peirce.html
Atkin, A. (2005). “C.S. Peirce’s Pragmatism”, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Retrieved 15 October 2013 from http://www.iep.utm.edu/peircepr/
Atkin, A. (2005). “Charles Sanders Peirce”, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Retrieved 15 October 2013 from http://www.iep.utm.edu/peircebi/
Mastin, L. (2008). “Charles Sanders Peirce”, The Basics of Philosophy. Retrieved 15
October 2013 from http://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_peirce.html
Creath, R. (2013). “Logical Empiricism”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Retrieved 15 October 2013 from
http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2013/entries/logical-empiricism/
Mastin, L. (2008). “Empiricism”, The Basics of Philosophy. Retrieved 15 October 2013
from http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_empiricism.html
Mastin, L. (2008). “Empiricism”, The Basics of Philosophy, Retrieved 15 October 2013
from http://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_hume.html
Fisser, J. (2011). “David Hume”, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 15
October 2013 from http://www.iep.utm.edu/hume/
Mastin, L. (2008). “Consequentialism” , The Basics of Philosophy. Retrieved 15 October
2013 from http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_consequentialism.html
Driver, J. (2011). “Gertrude Elizabeth Margaret Anscombe” , Stanford Encylopedia of
Philosophy. Retrieved 15 October 2013 from
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/anscombe/
Mastin, L. (2008). “Nihilism” , The Basics of Philosophy. Retrieved 15 October 2013
from http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_nihilism.html
Lombardi, E. (2013). “Ivan Turgenev Biography” , About.com. Retrieved 15 October
2013 from http://classiclit.about.com/cs/profileswriters/p/aa_iturgenev.htm
Machiavellianism (n.d.). Retrieved 15 October 2013 from Oxford English Dictionary
website,
http://oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/Machiavellian
Mastin, L. (2008). “Niccolo Machiavelli” , The Basics of Philosophy. Retrieved 15
October 2013 from
http://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_machiavelli.html
Lennox, J. (2010). “Darwinism” , Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 15
October 2013 from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/darwinism/
Sloan, P. (2008). “Evolution” , Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 15
October 2013 from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/evolution/
Situationism (2013). Retrieved 15 October 2013 from Dictionary.com website,
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/situationism
Joseph Fletcher (2013). Retrieved 15 October 2013 from NNDB website,
http://www.nndb.com/people/580/000169073/
Mastin, L. (2008). “Utilitarianism” , The Basics of Philosophy. Retrieved 15 October
2013 from http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_utilitarianism.html
Mastin, L. (2008). “Jeremy Bentham” , The Basics of Philosophy. Retrieved 15 October
2013 from http://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_bentham.html
Mastin, L. (2008). “Marxism” , The Basics of Philosophy. Retrieved 15 October 2013
from http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_marxism.html
Mastin, L. (2008). “Karl Marx” , The Basics of Philosophy. Retrieved 15 October 2013
from http://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_marx.html
Utilitarianism (n.d.). Retrieved 15 October 2013 from Religious Studies Revision
website,
http://www.rsrevision.com/Alevel/ethics/utilitarianism/strengths_weaknesses_util
itarianism.pdf